Billed as an innovation conference to attract the innovation fraternity – this conference was the brainchild of John Kearon Chief Juicer of the research agency Brainjuicer. He had the idea of gathering together the most interesting speakers he had heard in the last 12 months. BV Pradeep of Unilever offered their St James Road office in Kingston as a venue and so the event came together – a safe place for those specialising in innovation to set aside day for stimulating argument and discussion with some networking thrown in.
After John’s introduction, BV Pradeep, insighter in-chief
and member of Unilever’s global leadership team, led the conference through two
case studies: the Pro-age case study for Dove and the story of the launch of
the anti-dandruff shampoo Clear – the first an example of challenging the
conventions of the skincare market and targeting a whole new audience. And the
second a classic story of launching a fighting brand to challenge Head and
Shoulders’ overwhelming dominance and in at least one market to take market
leadership within a year. Useful examples because as emerged from the debate
afterwards successful product launches are as much about successful execution –
launching your plane down the runway and making sure that all 4 engines are
firing – as it requires reframing a marketplace with a piece of successful
insighting. The reason why Head and Shoulders was vulnerable was in part
because the high price point made it a profitable sector to attack – perceived
efficacy was linked to price! There was also an interesting discussion about
whether the Pro-age strategy marked a broadening of the natural beauty idea
from body shape to post menopausal skin or the next articulation of it.
And then something completely different. Michael Spencer of Sound Strategies followed
with a series of quiz questions about the use of sound as part of brand
identity. Because our vocabulary in explaining sounds is so limited we find it difficult
to talk about differences in types of music. What he seemed to demonstrate was
that the usage of sound was so misplaced it explained exactly why so few
companies put sound on their websites – it’s a very difficult thing to get
right. But this is a missed opportunity.
People become so much engaged with sound that with a proper strategy
sounds could become a powerful tool for establishing clear brand identities and
creating better recall and involvement.
Michael cited British Airways as a great example where the Lakme theme
has been reused and adapted for different contexts so that it is always
recognisable but doesn’t have to be the same score or specific recording. We
finished this session with a 4 part jungle chant with full audience
partcipation!
The Q and A following Mark’s session stretched for the best
part of half an hour. Which made a sizeable dent in the time John Kearon had
for his presentation. What followed was
an act of great generosity – John cut his session in half to get the conference
back on time. He spoke in praise of failure and outlined Thomas Edison’s 5
principles: align processes with goals, cultivate charismatic optimism, seek
knowledge relentlessly, experiment persistently, pursue rigorous objectivity.
And he asked a question which became a persistent theme through the afternoon.
Why is it that with the solitary exception of conjoint analysis in the 1950s
quantitative research has failed to produce any significant new technique for
two generations. Agencies grow by eating each other not by doing anything
different. One of John’s last slides
was a composite of the movers and shakers he respects in research at present –
in effect his significant competitors who he went through one by one
identifying how these pioneers were starting to break into new territory.
Jaroslav Cir, consumer and market insight director for
Rexona took up the baton to attack the myth of market research certainty. He pointed out that the availability of the
GMI panel made it easy for any of his own people to put out quick online
surveys to check hypotheses. Unilever can move faster because it doesn’t have
to wait for its suppliers. He tipped Facebook as the future of for market
research. Sorrell should have bought Facebook not TNS! To break new ground in
insighting it was better to trust individuals. At which point he namechecked
the semiotician Greg Rowland who got more mentions in the next half hour than Joe
the plumber in the last presidential debate!
At the end of the session there was an interesting exchange between
Pradeep and Jaroslav. Pradeep’s point was that to get Unilever’s management
behind an initiative you still need the classic evidential tools to provide an
element of certainty. But they agreed that without the leaps which individuals
could provide Unilever can’t grow – there is a genuine problem that the large
research agencies aren’t delivering the great leaps forward.
The last speaker of the afternoon was Andrew Gaule of the H-I network. What he showed was how diverse are the means for developing new products – there are literally dozens of models for developing revenue streams on the borders or even right outside the large organisations. His core schematic illustrated that modest changes in business focus could result in dramatic business growth through innovation. One of his examples was Philips – how do you grow a business where DVD players are now cheaper than DVDs? He showed a prototype which was designed externally and which Philips had manufactured – Philips is willing to turn inside out – assembling what outside designers create. When the questions started Andrew was a lot more equivocal. With so many different models to choose from he refused to be drawn on his preference for particular forms of spin off. Suits you sir seemed to be the mantra! It depends on what you need.
And so the day came to a conclusion – as we headed for the
drinks table we were each presented with a brain shaped stress cushion. So what
did the day deliver? Brainjuicer was
among friends so had no need to hustle its own products. Unilever’s hosting ensured that the content
of the day stayed focussed on client issues and not on supplier products. What
I enjoyed about the day was the achievement of a genuinely safe space for
exploring ideas. Confidentiality can only get you so far. I got the sense that
a lot of conversations were going on – conversations which would be difficult
to hold in other more conventional industry environments. So a good fest – hope
they do it again.
Comments